draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ; transport=dccp ?

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

Hi, draft-jennings-sip-dtls defines:

- SIP over DTLS over UDP => Via transport: "DTLS-UDP"
- SIP over DTLS over DCCP => Via transport: "DTLS-DCCP"
- SIP over DCCP => Via transport: "DCCP"

The draft just defines new BNF grammar for Via transport field, but
says nothing about SIP URI ;transport param.
IMHO the draft MUST define a new value "dccp" for ;transport param.

Regards,

[DRAGE, Keith (Keith)]

Given that as far as I can see, the last version of this document expired in 2008, I think you must regard any contents as historical.

It was never picked up by the SIP WG.

Regards

Keith

-----Original Message-----
Iñaki Baz Castillo
Sent: 08 July 2011 17:53
Subject: [Sip] draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ;
transport=dccp ?
- SIP over DTLS over UDP => Via transport: "DTLS-UDP"
- SIP over DTLS over DCCP => Via transport: "DTLS-DCCP"
- SIP over DCCP => Via transport: "DCCP"
The draft just defines new BNF grammar for Via transport field, but
says nothing about SIP URI ;transport param.
IMHO the draft MUST define a new value "dccp" for ;transport param.
Regards,
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is essentially closed and only used for finishing old business.
specifications.

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is essentially closed and only used for finishing old business.
Use sip-***@cs.columbia.edu for questions on how to develop a SIP implementation.
Use ***@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip.
Use ***@ietf.org for issues related to maintenance of the core SIP specifications.

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

Post by DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
Given that as far as I can see, the last version of this document expired in 2008, I think you must regard any contents as historical.
It was never picked up by the SIP WG.

Good point, I didn't realize of that. So, is there a draft or RFC
defining SIP over DTLS-UDP?

[DRAGE, Keith (Keith)]

The only SIP document was RFC 5763. That doesn't define it, and doesn't apparently need it.

Keith

-----Original Message-----
Sent: 08 July 2011 20:52
To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ;
transport=dccp ?

Post by DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
Given that as far as I can see, the last version of this document

expired in 2008, I think you must regard any contents as historical.

Post by DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
It was never picked up by the SIP WG.

Good point, I didn't realize of that. So, is there a draft or RFC
defining SIP over DTLS-UDP?
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is essentially closed and only used for finishing old business.
Use sip-***@cs.columbia.edu for questions on how to develop a SIP implementation.
Use ***@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip.
Use ***@ietf.org for issues related to maintenance of the core SIP specifications.